What with all this talk of homosexuality

[jillian]

Some people believe that. However, what's wrong with making exceptions to the rules when needed? Isn't our law flexible enough to do so?

And the people who believe that should make those choices for themslves, though I personally think people who have "litters" are irresponsible. It isn't my business what decisions they make.

And the laws, as proposed, that are coming up make no such exceptions.

I am interested in your response, though, to my perception that activists seem, really, to want the law to be punitive and how it really isn't pro-life, but pro-birth. And after that, the kid and it's mom are pretty much on their own.

 

[Gunny]

Ya had to go there, huh? :tng:

I think I already said I think that argument is fallacious. But mostly, I truly think it's punitive...you know, those salacious, evil women, like Eve in the garden...sinners who need to be punished.

Doesn't fly...at least not for me. Again, you're free to live by your own moral code. But abortion is a difficult enough decision to make without government and religious activists intervening.

There's a question that I always like to ask people who are anti-choice. Say a couple has gone for in vitro fertilization... they clearly made the choice to have a child and the child is wanted, so it isn't a question of "indiscretion". They go through the process and three or four of the embryos become implanted. The doctor tells the woman that she can only carry one or either she or the babies won't make it. They want to do a "selective termination".

What then? Under all the anti-choice scenarios I've seen bandied about, she would be prohibited from the selective termination and be forced to carry the multiples...even if the pregnancy risked her life, the babies' or both.

It doesn't fly with you because it doesn't suit your agenda. What you choose to call "punishment" is merely personal responsibility and dealing with the consequences of one's own actions.

And OF COURSE you have a loaded question you like to ask. I'm only surprised that you haven't tossed out the rape and incest argument as well.

Not everyone is as cut-n-dried black-n-white a you are attempting to represent. Abortion has ALWAYS been legal when carrying a child endangers the mother's life as a legitimate lifesaving medical procedure.

Hardly the same as using it for after-the-fact birth control.

 

[jillian]

It doesn't fly with you because it doesn't suit your agenda. What you choose to call "punishment" is merely personal responsibility and dealing with the consequences of one's own actions.

And OF COURSE you have a loaded question you like to ask. I'm only surprised that you haven't tossed out the rape and incest argument as well.

Seems to me that both sides of the argument have an agenda. They're just different agendas. To say otherwise really isn't forthright.

I don't think it's a loaded question. It's reality-based. I know that complicates things. But it seems to me that the anti-choice activists are the ones who see the world in black and white. Just my opinion, of course.

BTW, not one of the women I know who had to make that decision EVER used it as an alternative to birth control.

And, assuming you believe that, then I presume you have no problem with something like RU-486?

 

[5stringJeff]

OK, I'm just as guilty as any, but this thread has been derailed.